§ On the article of "onions" being proposed,
§ Mr. G. Palmermoved, that the duty of 1s. be substituted for that of 6d. This, he thought but fair towards a very poor class of growers, the more particularly as the reduction proposed by the Government was enormous, being from 3s. to 6d.
§ Mr. Gladstonesaid, that he had not the slightest hesitation in opposing this amendment, as it was entirely without grounds or recommendation. The hon. Member for Essex said, that the reduction was enormous. But why? Because the duty was enormous. The duty of 6d. was quite as large as the Government felt themselves justified in proposing, and would, he believed, amount to 30 per cent, upon the value of the article.
§ Mr. Wakleysaid, that by this reduction the people of Essex might be injured, but they were not on that account to follow the example of the hon. Member for Chester. If each Member were to look to the special instead of the general interests, it would be impossible for a Government to carry any measure of this nature. It was a most unfortunate thing for the 753 country that the House did not look more to its general interests. The hon. Member for Chester, for instance, having voted in favour of a protecting duty on cheese immediately left the House, consigning the question of onions to the protection of those hon. Members who represented the growers of that article. He sincerely hoped, that the independent Members of that House would give their assistance to the right hon. Baronet in the changes he was endeavouring to effect for the public good.
§ Duty agreed to.